Don't know anything about the Bryston.
Thanks
Bill |
Got a DAC 2 about 2 weeks ago. Here is a review of in about one week old with virtually no break in. The review was conducted at Mike Lenehans, the maker of Lenehan ML1's, on the Gold Coast in Australia
OK. First off when we arrived Mike (he is the owner of Lenehan Audio) said he had been listening to it and thought it was very good. In fact he thought it was as good as his much more expensive and highly tweaked pcm 1704 DAC - with maybe, just maybe his DAC being a bit better - but not by much. However they were very different. First when we went into the listening area he had the WFS DAC running and a smile immediately came over my face because it was exactly the sound I like - detailed, analytical and dark. Although its not something I particularly look for it had great bass as well - but that may have been part of the great detail. If you have heard delta sigma DAC's before then this was delta sigma in overdrive. Everyone thought it was the best delta sigma they had heard.
We were going to try the DAC Magic but Mike said - don't bother - this is way out of its league so we didn't give it a listen to. Mike was shocked a DAC this affordable could be this good. We then hooked up Mike's DAC. It was entirely different - much more relaxed and well musical - but the detail had gone and the bass was not as good. In quality terms I thought they were both equal - just different. Evidently because Mike was so shocked at how good it was he had been extensively comparing it to his DAC and thought in the end his DAC may have had a slight edge - but it was scary close - not in terms of the type of sound - they were very different - but in terms of how good they were. I had no where near the experience Mike has with his DAC, and of course I have a bias because I purchased the WFS DAC, but to me it was more than scary close - they were equal - again in terms of quality - not in type of sound.
We tried the WFS sound direct into the amp and the digital volume control, and as you would expect, it was utterly transparent - no pre amp required here. We tried both optical and USB - I thought the USB may have been slightly better, but others were not so sure, so it may have been my imagination. One issue though - the USB drivers crashed a few times which is not good. That was on a mac so hopefully the windows version is more stable. Of course that is not good, and is something WFS needs to look into pretty quick.
Next up was the Audio GD which is also a 1704 implementation. It was actually scary close to Mike's DAC - Mike's DAC was better, but really there was not much in it. And at $1300 it is very good value. It had the same relaxed musical presentation as Mike's DAC. However it did not include a digital volume control, but if you are feeding it from a computer then that is not an issue since you can use your computers volume control. But it is not as flexible as the WFS in that sense.
Now to the bottom line. Since all the DAC's were close in quality terms it comes down to a personal preference thing. If you like detail and good bass go for the WFS. If you like a more relaxed musical presentation go for Mike's or the Audio GD DAC (you will need to contact Mike about his DAC- but its a good deal more expensive than either the WFS or the Audio GD). I personally like the extra detail so for me it's the WFS DAC. But the two other guys (Hugh and Terry) liked the 1704 DACs. The WFS is about $1900 compared to the $1300.00 for the Audio GD. To my ears the WFS was sightly better in quality terms - but there was hardly anything in it. Was it $600.00 difference - in the way I judge these things probably not - maybe $100.00 or $200.00. Also this is the middle quality Audio GD - the higher quality DAC would probably more than make up this difference and may even pip the WFS - but we can't be sure because we didn't try it. It so then it would be up to Mike's DAC and have the same relaxed musical presentation.
I will say this is not the result I expected - but was what we found. I am very happy with my DAC since it has the type of sound I like - but it may not be your cup of tea. My suggestion is to try and listen to both types of DAC's - a WFS and a 1704. If you like the WFS sound get that. If you like the 1704 get an Audio GD. Mike is so impressed with the WFS sound he wants it there for longer so he can get to the bottom of its sound - he is still shocked a DAC this cheap can be this good.
I had heard this DAC was scary close to the best out there with the difference in price possibly not worth it - this is what I found. What I did not expect was that is true in quality terms - not in the type of sound you get.
Because of this I am reminded of the Tranquility DAC which is the other DAC people are raving about. It is supposed to combine the best of both DACs - to have the relaxed musicality of the 1704's but the detail of delta sigma DAC's. I was not attracted to this DAC because you need a pre amp - a good one which costs more than the WFS DAC itself. However after hearing both DAC's I can see how a combination of the two would be killer. Pre amp or no pre amp I may just have to bite the bullet and check this DAC out. It may be a fizzer but if true it would really be something. I will give very careful consideration to getting one of these imported.
Me and another guy thought we could easily live with any of the DAC's. It is only via a direct comparison you appreciate the differences. But for some others (Hugh and Terry) the 1704 was their clear preference. Mike had to leave a bit early so I was not able to get his final verdict - but I suspect it was for his 1704.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi All
A trusted acquaintance popped around to Mike's last Monday to hear the WFS. He thought it sounded awful and Mike thought it was a lot worse than when he heard it previously. Something funny going on here - it probably needs some serious break-in time - but I would hold off getting one until this is sorted out. I will be leaving it at Mikes to get that break-in and report on how it sounds as the break in proceeds.
Next Saturday me and an acquaintance will be popping around to Mike's and comparing it to a Havana as well as Mikes tweaked 1704.
Thanks
Bill |
First it was not me that had problems with the unit - it was an aquantance. On Saturday I will be able to report on what I think once it has broken in a bit.
Second I clearly indicated the amount of break in it had - virtually none. It had a slight bit more break-in when my friend listened to it - maybe and extra 20-30 hours.
Thirdly I clearly pointed out it was different to the other DAC's we listened to. I thought its strengths of better bass, dynamics and detail (which in my experience are the strengths of delta sigmas DAC's) bought it up to the level of the 1701 DAC's we were also listening to. Two others did not think so - in their view the the 1701 DAC's were clearly better. Although they freely admitted this was the best delta sigma they had ever heard they did not like it. Basically they don't like the delta sigma signature - quite possibly because the DAC's they listen to all the time are 1701's.
Now as to why it actually went backwards the jury is still out. Mike thought it was because the unbroken in ML1 speakers we tried the DAC on has weaknesses the strengths of the delta sigma DAC compensated for. They are slightly bass shy and recessed in the treble - but they loosen up. The speakers my acquaintance who has done a lot reviews listened to them on were well broken in ML3's. On that system the bass, to him, sounded over bloated and one note. It may simply be he does not like the delta sigma signature either. However he did not think the speakers were the issue - simply units sometimes do funny things during break in.
I must also say anyone who expects a view based on personal preferences to be definitive in any way is mistaken. It should form the basis of what you should seek out and actually hear rather than making purchasing decisions. In the end it may divide listeners - those that like and those that don't. Some famous DAC's are like that eg the MSB Link of quite a few years ago did that - some loved it - some hated it:
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0200/anmeetsmsb.htm
Were those that said it was great lame? Were those that said it was hopeless lame? Of course not - they were simply expressing a personal preference. To expect anything else is pretty lame IMHO. I must also add I actually got an MSB Link many years ago and did not like the bass - it was overpowering and one note in my system. It loosened up over time but was never quite there for me. I preferred my less expensive DAC Magic 1. I may be out of luck with this DAC as well. Hopefully not since I did not find the bass bloated and one note - but as Mike said that may because the ML1's were not broken in. If so - tough luck for me. But hopefully not for you since you are alerted to the issue and can hear it first.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Guys
No hidden agenda.
Yes I have posted this on a number of forums before posting here. Thats because I only just discovered this thread and thought guys that frequent here would like to know what I found out.
As to their value I think provided I make it clear what is going on people can make up their own mind. I believe it is of value knowing some people had problems during break-in. I believe it is of value some people didn't like the DAC and they are people that prefer DAC's like the PCM 1704 (sorry guys I accidentally called it a 1701 instead of a 1704 in my last post). I believe there is value in others pointing out the limitations of my comments. This is all part of getting the information out there for those interested in this DAC. After all this what forums like this are all about. I still have what happened with the Link DAC in my mind - basically about $1000.00 wasted - well not wasted really - I learnt a valuable lesson.
And yes in hindsight I guess I was a bit thin skinned about the lame comment. I dont get anything for posting - I have no hidden agenda - only the desire to help others and participate in some enjoyable debate about a hobby that since I retired is now taking up more of my time. Calling this 'lame' touched a bit of a raw nerve.
Can we proceed with me posting my observations and others pointing out issues and making their own observations? I will attempt to be as constructive as possible and hopefully others will do the same.
Thanks
Bill |
Sure will let you know at 200 plus hours. The listening this Saturday may not have quite that time on it (but it should be close since Mike has been burning it in since about Wednesday last week) and although I will post what I find out here and elsewhere the exact amount of break-in will be made clear so no confusion can result.
And some time down the track I will be doing a direct comparison to the tranquility DAC, the other DAC people rave about since direct comparison to this DAC have not appeared. I almost certainly will not get this DAC for various reasons not related to sound (it only accepts USB input for instance and does not have a digital volume control for direct connection to an amp) but none the less this is one comparison I am looking forward to.
Thanks
Bill |
Will be doing a comparison of the WFS with the Havana on Saturday.
Thanks
Bill |
That's interesting because thats similar to what the experienced reviewer acquaintance of mine said about the WFS - the bass was bloated and one note. Personally I am not expecting that much of the Havana in comparison - after all at least here in Aus it half the price. Occasionally you find giant killers that surprise but that is not the norm. But you never know. Of course I will be giving my impressions and hopefully the owner of the Havana can chime in as well.
Thanks
Bill |
That's just his view. I tend to give good weight to what he says because of his experience reviewing stuff - he is a reviewer for an audiophile magazine and has done tons of them. My view, as I mentioned in my initial post, is the bass has greater slam, strength and detail, not bloated or one note at all - but hey it was virtually straight out of the box. A much better test will happen Saturday.
Thanks
Bill |
Haven't had a chance to audition the Tranquility yet. Due to some issues there is no need to go into about here it will be shipped to me in Australia Monday. It was going to be part of a DAC shootout Saturday week and there is now some doubt it will not reach here in time for that. I will keep my fingers crossed but it will be tight.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi All
I thought I posted my review from last Saturday but it still doesn't seem to be there. Rather than post it again and have two posts if it does eventually appear I will give a link to audio circles where I also posted it:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=83276.20
Bottom line from me is - yes it is very good but more expensive DAC's can beat it - and it was not scary close to the one that did beat it. And from my perspective that USB issue is very maddening. I will contact EJ about it and try to get it sorted out - but I am not looking forward to it. I am sure it will eventually get rectified one way of another but bug hunting and rectification is not my idea of fun. I worked as a programmer for 30 years with 20 year as a senior programmer/team leader. I grew to hate it then and now I am retired thought my days of doing it were over - I was wrong.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Again All
Had a chance to put the WFS into my system and ho-rah ho-rah actually got it to work by using the Kernel Streaming mode of J River as recommended by EJ at WFS. Even got the 192/24 bit up-sampling working. Already I can say it is a few notches above the Audio GD Compass I was using before - but I already knew that from the comparisons we had done. Interestingly it may have toned down a bit of metallic glare and sibilance control that I put down to the little tripath amp I was previously using. Will report further as my listening progresses.
Thanks
Bill |
Now I got the 192/24 bit up-sampling working and have been listening for a few hours- WOW - the detail this thing retrieves is quite simply breathtaking. For example did you know there was a bit of tape hiss in parts of Christina Aguilera Back to Basics - neither did I - but I heard it very clearly. Not only that but the slight glare and sibilance my system had has now been reduced to the point you have to concentrate a bit to hear it most of the time. I think while Mikes DAC is better hearing it this way (ie via up-sampling and asynchronous USB) may level the playing field a bit. There even less doubt in my mind now computer audio is the future.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Guys
Been playing around with the DAC and have noticed the right side is louder than the left. I don't know why we didn't notice it before - all I can think of is when we were testing it the balance was adjusted to compensate or maybe it only happens on the USB input.
However this seems to a known issue:
http://www.wyred4sound.com/
Anyway I have contacted EJ at WFS and put in a service request to get a new top cover assembly. I suspect simply adjusting the balance will resolve the issue in the interim so will continue checking it out until the fix arrives.
Thanks
Bill |
When it first came out the scuttlebutt was it was scary close to the best out there at any price. My testing and comparison showed it was probably the best in its price range, with the possible exception of the Tranquility, but it was simply close to the best out there - not scary close. I am still happy, even with the balance issue and am glad I got the DAC.
Thanks
Bill |
I will be organizing getting the Tranquility about the 18th August. But since I am in Australia there are importation issues etc that could delay things. I will have it clearly marked audio gear for evaluation so hopefully it should go straight through but these things are always iffy.
Thanks
Bill |
I have had some feedback from EJ that he is getting a bit of flack about some of my posts and they do not reflect what I have said to him.
To set the record straight my concern about the DAC had to do with not being able to get the USB working. This has now been resolved and is working flawlessly using kernel steaming. I have since become aware that problems with Windows 7 had to do with an update to windows. Having worked in the IT industry as a programmer for many years my experience is these types of problems are virtually impossible to avoid. Knowing this I now believe when I said products should not be released with these types of driver problems it was not a correct assessment of the true situation. From what I can gather extensive testing was done.
My position on the sonic's is it is close to the best out there at any price. It has the best detail of any DAC I have ever heard. It totally outclassed an Havana is every area. It was close to Mike's reference DAC but in the areas of sibilance control, fluidity, liquidity, musicality and sound-staging that DAC was better. Not hugely better - it was close - but it was better. That DAC however is a lot more expensive, heavily tweaked, and in many ways an unfair comparison. The reason I mention it the original scuttlebutt is it was scary close to the best out there at any price. However I found it was 'just' close. I put just in quotes here because I don't want people to get the wrong idea - this is a tremendous accomplishment. I also want to add I have had a chance to listen using up-sampled 192/24 material and material recorded at at 192/24. This raised the bar even further and I want to do a direct comparison to Mikes DAC and the Tranquility DAC specifically checking this out. Although I can't preempt the outcome of that new comparison because audible memory is a poor thing, my feeling is using that it may be scary close or even equal. Without reservation I recommend this DAC. The only DAC I am aware of in its price range that may be its equal is the Tranquility and I will be doing a specific comparison to check it out. This is expected to occur sometime later this month.
With regard to the balance issue please be aware this is of zero concern to me. I worked in the IT industry for many years and any new product goes through similar teething issues. That is only to be expected. Both EJ and the distributor I got it through here in Australia - Deep Hz Audio - are doing everything in their power to correct this quickly. Their after sales service is absolutely impeccable and a real credit to both organizations. Having problems does not concern me as much as how well they are corrected. This problem so far has been corrected in a flawless and timely manner to my complete satisfaction.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Rayooo
I didn't check anything at 96k since 192k was available. I did notice a bit more detail with 192k up-sampling and native 192k was better again. Did'nt have 96k to check out but I would imagine up-sampling 96k to 192k would not be much if any better. However I would still do it. The reason I do up-sampling in J River rather than let the ESS DAC do it is the up-sampling algorithms in J River are state of the art right now while the up-sampling used in the ESS are not that recent and the DAC chip probably doesn't have the processing power of your PC which limits how good the up-sampling can be.
Thanks
Bill |
Technically for the reasons I outlined I go 192k, but it would come as no surprise to me if 96k is just as good audibly. Actually I was just speaking to Eric Hider at dB Audio Labs the makers of the Tranquility and he says the best recordings he has ever heard were straight bog standard CD audio - but specially mastered direct from tape. High res is better but there is surprising quality to be found in bog standard 16 bit.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Guys
The Tranquility just arrived. Have done a quick evaluation with a Windows Notebook which is far from its optimum setup. Already however to our ears we think it is better than the WFS - no trace of the sibilance issue. Both Dianna Krall and Tom Jones Praise and Blame sounded very fluid, liquid and musical. Maybe not quite the detail of the WFS. The output stage, while solid state, sounds very non solid state like.
What is planned is it will remain down at Mike Lenehans for a few days while he checks it out further. I will contact Eric Hider to set up the Mac Mini optimally then we can give it a serious evaluation.
Thanks
Bill |
The guy whose reference system we tried it out on did some further investigation when I left and this is what he posted in an unrelated thread on another forum (it was about a DAC shootout we were at):
Bill had a normal Laptop and I think he was using I River (it was J River) software. First impressions were ! well a little underwhelming. Nice and smooth to be sure , top end seemed a little down to me and the bass was Ahh lazy ! It did nothing wrong but it did nothing right either ! the ConnorNM24 killed it in my view. OK so bill leaves and I thought Id just drop my Compaq laptop on and feed it some of my wav files from I tunes. HOLY SMOKE what just happened, It was instantly competitive with the NM24. This little alloy brick thingy must be very sensitive to what USB signal its fed. More on this device soon when we feed it with a Mac mini ( as recommended by Eric Hider ) It did however trail behind the NM24 overall and particularly in the bass , being still a touch inarticulate and rounded. Resolution was very good with no hardness or detectable digititis evident Perhaps with MacMini integration we could have a real competitor. Although Mr Hider hasnt stated what DAC is being used it sounds very 1704 ish to me.
So bottom line here is even with a bog standard windows machine we were achieving results comparable to an uber expensive heavily tweaked statement DAC. However this is getting a bit out of the scope of this thread. For you guys it is probably best to follow it on the thread in Audio Circles where I will be posting this stuff.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=74816.440
Thanks
Bill |
EJ recommended, and what I used, was Kernel Streaming Tried ASIO but it did not work. It's not hard to try various modes and see what you like best. However I have now switched to using the Mac OS rather than Windows and have found Play to be a bit clearer than JRIVER so that is what I now use.
However right now I have a stinking case of severe bronchitis and the last thing I feel like doing is listen to Hi Fi.
Thanks
Bill |
Thats it. But I have found Play under the MAC to be a bit better - clearer to my ears.
Thanks
Bill |
Yea it makes sense. The reason I up-sampled everything to 192/24 is I thought it reduced the sibilance control issue better. But what I found was the mac operating system was better, and with further experimenting I found Play with no up-sampling sounded better again - clearer and more neutral to my ears. However interestingly today when we checked out Play on the Tranquility one of the guys thought the bass was a problem. My advice is to suck it and see.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Cutterfilm
You may be running into the slight upper midrange issue the Saber chip has. This is an excellent DAC but when compared to much more expensive DAC's you can hear this. It may be inherent to the Saber chip or it may be that it is a difficult chip to work with. When we did our DAC shootout one person rated this DAC better than even the much more expensive reference DAC's we had there which is no mean feat. But I think the comments of one person there summed it up:
'An amazing amount of detail, excellent tonal consistency and powerful bass. But it sounded like you were playing a CD and there were electronic artifacts in the form of a mid treble glare that intruded. Grey background. Microdynamically restricted. However its combination of consistent tonality and detail was impressive in a hifi sense and I can actually believe that some listeners might place this as their favourite.'
You may simply be one of those people who prefer something a little different. I am in that boat as well so don't beat yourself up over it if that turns out to the case. I found I preferred the Tranquility DAC.
Personal preferences and system synergies make it really hard for any one product to do it for everyone.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Cutterfilm
Oh I forgot to mention I think you have simply run into a system synergy thing that the removal of the pre amp highlighted. I suspect by bypassing the pre amp your system is now more transparent and you can hear some of the issues that were being masked.
Thanks
Bill |
If you are extremely sensitive to sibilance and glare then I believe the WFS will not be your preference. This is not to slight the DAC - it is very hard to make a DAC that will synergige in everyones system to their taste. The tranquility will be a better choice IMHO for you. It was instantly competitive with a very expensive reference DAC that was describes this way:
'But let me say the things a beast ! Ive spent time with a full DCS stack and I can tell you the Connor24 smacks it down simple as that. The 24 is a DCS stack with a velvet glove.'
The Tranquility really is a hard nut to crack. The reason you may prefer the WFS is if you prefer the following type of presentation as described by one person at the shootout:
'An amazing amount of detail, excellent tonal consistency and powerful bass. But it sounded like you were playing a CD and there were electronic artifacts in the form of a mid treble glare that intruded. Grey background. Microdynamically restricted. However its combination of consistent tonality and detail was impressive in a hifi sense and I can actually believe that some listeners might place this as their favourite.'
Thanks
Bill |
I have used the DAC2 both as a pre and in a system with a pre. I have noticed zero difference in how the DAC sounds if you set the output to fixed or variable. And the input impedance of the amps I have used should have, and did not, place any strain on the DAC ie it was easily over 10K.
Thanks
Bill |
Hi Guys
Regarding the glare and sibilance thing its great you guys are not experiencing it. However everyone at the recent DAC shootout heard it and the other DAC's did not have it - well the modded Oppo may have had it a little bit but that was from someone with am exceptional ear who listens to Hi Fi day on day out for a living - I actually didn't hear it in the Oppo. My personal opinion is its a system synergy thing that appears if you system is revealing enough. The system we tried it on at the shootout was very very reveling without going into the details. Buy IMHO it does not have to be uber revealing - it shows up quite easily on my home system. Also I want to emphasize at least one person thought this was the best DAC there which is a really great accomplishment. Just had a chat to the guy that wrote about the WFS at the shootout and he still thinks what he said sums it up:
An amazing amount of detail, excellent tonal consistency and powerful bass. But it sounded like you were playing a CD and there were electronic artifacts in the form of a mid treble glare that intruded. Grey background. Microdynamically restricted. However its combination of consistent tonality and detail was impressive in a hifi sense and I can actually believe that some listeners might place this as their favorite.
As far as hearing one is concerned this DAC is the DAC of the moment right now so if you got one and didn't like you it you should have no trouble on selling it. Its what I did and have no regrets about trying it. I will be getting a good friend who runs a review site to review it then on sell it. I am pretty sure I will get close to what I paid for it.
Thanks
Bill |
We ran the WFS as a pre. The reference system we used has an extremely good isolation stand. The amp was Macintosh 501's mono-blocks that many rate as possibly the best amps you can buy. The amps were heavily isolated as well. The speakers were Lenehan ML3's reference fully tricked out with Dulund capacitors and hand tuned. These are the bigger brothers of the famous Lenehan Ml1's that are often said to be the best mini monitors you can get. They are dead neutral and include heroic measures to reduce resonance such as lining them with steel. That is just one measure they use. Many, including myself, rate them as simply the finest speakers they have ever heard even above such famous speakers as Quad electrostatics and Martin Logsans. Take my word for it these speakers are as revealing as you can get. This is not just my view - we had a professional reviewer present who has heard more stuff that I can poke a stick at. He was so impressed with these speakers he is getting a pair as am I.
We all heard the sibilance issue as clear as a bell. Neither the Tranquility nor the systems reference DAC had it. It is not just me that heard it - everyone at the shootout including the professional reviewer did as well. I am simply conjecturing it is how revealing the system is that accounts for it. That may not be it. All I can say is I even hear it on my home system. If that is not the case then your guess is as good as mine.
Thanks
Bill |
